Posted on 11/06/2010 3:16:45 AM PDT by Smokeyblue
State Rep. Timothy W. Jones (R-Eureka) of the Missouri House of Representatives was unanimously elected by the new Republican caucus to be the next Majority Floor Leader. Why is that newsworthy? Because he was represented by "Birther Queen" Orly Taitz in a federal case alleging that President Barack Obama was secretly an Indonesian named Barry Soetoro and ineligible to be President of the United States.
Jones was listed as a plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by lawyer-dentist Taitz to obtain an original birth certificate, immigration records, passports and other vital records from Obama.
Taitz is pretty pumped about Jones being in a position of power. "WOW, an unapologetic birther is unanimously elected to be the speaker of MO Hopuse of Representatives!!!" Taitz wrote on her blog. "PLEASE, CONTACT HIM AND DEMAND THAT HE BRINGS THIS ISSUE TO THE FLOOR OF THE STATE HOUSE OF REP-S."
(Excerpt) Read more at tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com ...
it would appear that what some of our timid (R) friends arent realizing in this case is that it was the the Republican caucus from MO themselves that just made this so called birther nut (who was a party to an eligibility lawsuit) their leader...knowing full well hos past involvement on thw issue. it appears that THEY dont have an issue with him.
it would appear that what some of our timid (R) friends arent realizing in this case is that it was the the Republican caucus from MO themselves that just made this so called birther nut (who was a party to an eligibility lawsuit) their leader...knowing full well hos past involvement on thw issue. it appears that THEY dont have an issue with him.
Missouri may only issue COLB’s, but it is the federal government, specifically the Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare, that establishes the requirements for record keeping.
And, here are those requirements, that are REQUIRED to be maintained and submitted by all states (or they don't get their federal money).
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/birth11-03final-ACC.pdf
And before Non-WhatsItsName says this wasn't true when Obama was born, here are the requirements for 1961:
http://www.theobamafile.com/_exhibits/CDCBirthCertificateRequirements.pdf
The only way I have heard of to get around the de facto officer doctrine is that, if the ineligibility of a government officer is raised as an objection in a court case, and the case goes against the plaintiff, and the officer is later ruled to be ineligible, this can be part of the grounds for appeal in the case.
It is just wishful thinking to imagine that having Obama declared ineligible will nullify all the laws he has signed just because Joe Blow questioned his eligibility in 2007. That completely goes against the whole purpose of the de facto officer doctrine.
"To satisfy the doctrine, the officer must be in the unobstructed possession of the office and discharging its duties in full view of the public, in such manner and under such circumstances as not to present the appearance of being an intruder or usurper."
http://info.libraries.vermont.gov/SUPCT/160/op92-113.txt
At this point in the "game", does anyone honestly still believe he is NOT presenting the appearance of being an intruder or usurper?
Just did some looking at the MO AG. Sigh. Heavily supported by trial lawyers and unions, was republican but switched to democrat in 2007 to catch the dem wave but then 2 days after the election this year joined with other AG’s to file a brief in support of AZ’s immigration law (catching the wave going the other direction).
Seems like this guy follows every wind of the polls. Opportunistic. I don’t know whether he could be trusted with an investigation like this. Maybe he’d be gung-ho to get on it while the sentiment is popular but as soon as the media got ahold of it he could turn faster than you can say Jim Robinson.
We need somebody with integrity, who honestly cares about justice and won’t play politics with it. Somebody oblivious to the media.
I still remember the “truth squads” in MO shortly before the 2008 election - law enforcement bodies which said they would make legal trouble for anybody with signs on their lawns claiming that Obama was going to raise taxes or is a Muslim (both of which seem to be true, given the fiscal mess we’re in and Obama’s statement to the Egyptian ambassador that he was and still is a Muslim who supports the Muslim agenda). If that’s the state of law enforcement in MO, maybe that’s not the best place to hope for integrity and honesty in such an important investigation.
What did the election do in Virginia? Ken Cuccinelli could be a better AG to get on the case, if possible. Or does anybody see any openings that have been created? What’s our best bet?
Maybe MO would be the best place to work on a law requiring proof of eligibility to be submitted before placement on the primary or general election ballot. Sounds like the MO legislature shows some promise, especially under this guy’s leadership. Their AG doesn’t look very promising to me for an investigation of Pelosi though, because he’s shifty and too tied in to groups that seem to despise justice.
Anybody else have observations or perceptons about this?
Do you understand the difference between 'recommended' and 'required'?
Absopositively!
No, thousands of posts on hundreds of birther threads have tried to make up their own reality.
The fact is, were a state to pass a requirement to present a birth certificate (which I'm all for BTW) then the one he's already made available would meet that requirement anyway.
The claim that a state “only issues COLBs” is a straw man diversion, as recently proved by danae (thank you so much for your efforts, danae).
A shortform COLB is a summary _output_ from a stored record in computer database file. That record was created using source documents and subsequent inputs to that record including just who it was that attested to the birth of the child, any changes to the record by amendment or adoption, and presumably where the birth specifically occurred.
While a COLB computer database printout may be just fine for all citizens except the president, it is not adequate for establishing eligibility to the certainty required for national security, as explicitly explained by the founders.
A COLB computer printout that can’t be validated with disclosure of all the vital records that resulted in the data shown on the COLB could allow for corrupt state politicians to hide ineligibility and also enable corrupt political parties to get candidates on the ballot who are not eligible.
Political parties have an obvious conflict of interest when certifying eligibility contrary to the ludicrous ruling by the 9th Circuit that parties “presumably” would want to avoid certifying a candidate who could be subsequently found to have been ineligible. Therefore, political parties cannot be entrusted with the final vetting candidates before they are placed on the ballot.
Also, state secretaries of state (SOS) almost always have party affiliation which can give rise to conflict of interest and they, too, can be corrupted and must have checks on any vetting that they do, which is currently lacking.
To provide checks on both the political parties and the state SOS I recommend that:
1. All states require that to appear on the state primary and presidential ballots, the candidates must waive all personal privacy privilege regarding all of their vital birth records any state or any country where they may have been born and waive confidentiality for all living witnesses or persons who signed any vital records in any state or county that may have birth records for the candidate. Private citizens must have standing to demand privacy waivers for birth records in any state or country not volunteered by the candidate.
2. The state secretaries of state (SOS) should be required to use the waivers signed by all candidates to obtain and disclose to the public all of the vital records for all presidential candidates for their claimed state of birth. The citizens should be given standing to sue for the SOS to solicit birth records from all US states and foreign countries where there is any connection to the parents of the candidate and any possibility that the candidate was born there. Then the SOS should be required to affirm that the candidate is constitutionally eligible as an NBC and spell out exactly what the definition of NBC means for the certification. Citizens must have standing to constest that definition.
3. The states should enact legislation giving standing to all citizens of the state to challenge in court any ruling of the state SOS that a candidate is NBC including standing to demand that a state “court of competent jurisdiction” order discovery of any vital birth records and testimony of any witnesses in any state and, if necessary, issue a judicial request to any country related to the reporting of the birth of any candidate. At a minimum, birth location should be resolved prior to the candidate being placed on the ballot.
It ain’t right, that’s for sure - but WHAT do you propose is to be done about it? I don’t care if this new bunch in Congress chooses to remove him; I fervently WISHED at the time they’d removed Clinton. It’s just that they CANNOT afford to get sidetracked from WHY THEY WERE ELECTED. If they can remove Hussein, well and good; but they better be for darn sure they can finish the job when they start it - and without leaving the rest of it undone!
Git ‘er done. I’m all for it.
Impressive audio editing there, eh.
Well, git ‘er done. Remove him and I’ll cheer as will many others. You’ll do it over the dead bodies of the lamestream media, the establishment elites, and others - which is fine by me. - Git ‘er done!
And I have a problem believing that it isn't. I am 99% sure that SOME bureaucracy in Missouri keeps the records. They just need to be given different marching orders.
Grand Juries have the power to subpoena the Hawaii DOH for his original long form record, as well as the original hand written index of live births from 1961. The DOH refused all other requests, but I doubt it could refuse yours!
He has never presented a genuine birth record. What he presented on Factcheck has been confirmed as a forgery by the Hawaii Department of Health, in two different ways.
That’s what those “thousands of posts” referred to have been talking about. Haven’t you been listening?
Here’s a starting point for the actual information, although I’m still thinking through the ramifications of Cheney’s failure to ask for objections in the electoral vote count, as required by law. It could be that Obama never has been the POTUS because he has never even been lawfully declared the winner of the electoral vote which would make his inauguration unlawful. But I have a little more checking I want to do on that. Anyway, here’s the summary that links to the actual documentation from the HDOH and Hawaii laws and rules.
http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/08/09/the-summary-cnn-doesnt-want-you-to-see/
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.